DOCSLIB.ORG

02 Goals & Objectives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
02 Goals & Objectives II. Goals and Objectives The goals of the Campus Master Plan represent ideals to strive for in the conservation and development of the Seattle Campus. They provide a foundation for a vision of the campus for the future. Their major theme originates from the notion that the existing campus is an important place balanced by open spaces and buildings which reinforce and define each other. As an institution of higher learning, the valued significant elements of the environment, both natural and built, must be conserved. Equally, opportunities for change, enhancement, and advancement must be facilitated. The goals described in this chapter are the basis for the general policies listed in Chapter III and development program recommendations outlined in Chapter IV. Following approval by the City Council and the Board of Regents of the Campus Master Plan, the general policies and development program recommendations as set forth in Chapters III and IV, will be used to guide the design and development of each of the proposed development sites. Approved Compiled Plan January 2003 7 The Mission of the University of Washington The campus environment should support and facilitate the mission of the University. The planning process began with the mission of the University as a public institution dedicated to learning, teaching, research, and community service. With the mission as a starting point, input was solicited from the community and goals were created. “The primary mission of the University of Washington is the preservation, advancement, and dissemination of knowledge. The University preserves knowledge through its libraries and collections, its courses, and the scholarship of its faculty. It advances new knowledge through many forms of research, inquiry, and discussion; and disseminates it through the classroom and the laboratory, scholarly exchanges, creative practice, international education, and public service. As one of the nation’s outstanding teaching and research institutions, the University is committed to maintaining an environment for objectivity and imaginative inquiry and for the original scholarship and research that ensure the production of new knowledge in the free exchange of diverse facts, theories, and ideas. To promote their capacity to make humane and informed decisions, the University fosters an environment in which its students can develop mature and independent judgment and an appreciation of the range and diversity of human achievement. The University cultivates in its students both critical thinking and the effective articulation of Portage Bay Vista and the Southwest Campus Figure II-1 that thinking.” University of Washington Faculty Handbook 8 University of Washington Master Plan -- Seattle Campus: Goals and Objectives Goals of the Campus Master Plan In order to support the mission of the University, the Campus Master Plan should: RESPECT ITS STATURE The Campus Master Plan should honor the status of the campus as a national treasure, a work of art, and a triumph of environmental design, enriching life with a harmonious marriage of space, form and participation. ENSURE STEWARDSHIP The Campus Master Plan should ensure good stewardship of the existing campus, maintaining and protecting the value of the University’s physical resources and character, history, architecture and open space. Changes to the campus should improve and enhance, rather than detract from, the value and quality of the campus. The Campus Master Plan identifies and encourages preservation of historic resources and open space. PROVIDE FACILITIES The Campus Master Plan should provide for the facility and infrastructure needs of the next decade. MAXIMIZE FLEXIBILITY The Campus Master Plan should provide the maximum amount of flexibility in order to best accommodate future growth and take advantage of unforeseen opportunities. ENHANCE THE CAMPUS The Campus Master Plan should create an aesthetic quality appropriate to the campus as a whole and to specific areas, conserving and improving existing buildings, open spaces, and views on campus, and looking for opportunities to create additional open spaces. PROVIDE ACCESSIBILITY The Campus Master Plan should ensure access to and within the campus, maximizing non-vehicular travel, emphasizing pedestrian routes for all pedestrians, and promoting the design of environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for special arrangements or adaptations. PROMOTE SAFETY The Campus Master Plan should help create a safe and healthy environment, with personal and workplace safety considerations integral to planning and design of circulation elements, buildings, and open spaces. RESPECT THE ENVIRONMENT The Campus Master Plan should value the environment and strive to promote the conservation of natural resources and goals of the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act. ENCOURAGE EFFICIENCY The Campus Master Plan should encourage efficiency and economy in University operations, with advantageous locations for facilities and advantageous adjacencies of uses. VALUE THE COMMUNITY The Campus Master Plan should recognize the importance of the surrounding communities and strive to achieve compatible working relationships with these communities to improve the quality of life and public benefits for all in the vicinity. Approved Compiled Plan January 2003 9 Objectives by Element new open spaces. • propose design standards that will increase safety and The Campus Master Plan focuses on three elements: open space, comfort in campus open spaces. transportation and circulation, and potential development. The objectives that follow represent ideas for change. They also embrace • link the University’s open space and pedestrian circulation many of the ideas expressed in the University Community Urban systems into the community and surrounding open space Center Plan (UCUCP, August 1998—see Chapter IX). Decision- systems. makers should strive to achieve these objectives. Costs and schedule- related factors will need to be considered in the decision making • strengthen visual and physical links to the waterfront. process. In some cases, when conflicts occur, there may be a need to balance these objectives with other factors such as budget, funding, Transportation and Circulation Objectives academic priorities and scheduling. In those cases where factors such as budget, funding, academic priorities, and scheduling result in a In compliance with the terms of the City-University Agreement, the decision that is not in accord with the goals stated in the Seattle Campus Master Plan should ensure access to and within the campus Campus Master Plan, a full explanation shall be provided for project by all modes of transportation, maximizing non-vehicular travel and reviewers and decisionmakers. encouraging a safe and pleasant environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. Open Space Objectives The Campus Master Plan should: The Campus Master Plan should conserve and enhance existing open • improve the pedestrian experience on campus. spaces and views to and from campus and look for opportunities to create additional safe and attractive open spaces. • increase access for pedestrians and bicyclists, both to and within the campus. The Campus Master Plan should: • designate important open spaces and views on campus • minimize conflicts between pedestrians, bicycles, and and create policies to ensure their preservation and vehicles. maintenance. • improve public transportation with the goal of minimizing • identify areas that could become safe and pleasant new vehicle trips to campus and related parking requirements; open spaces. provide safe, convenient access for pedestrians to and from public transportation. • propose opportunities to use landscape elements to strengthen the structure of the campus. • minimize the amount of new parking facilities while still providing parking for the variety of users on campus, • identify areas where links between open spaces could be including the disabled, with the least impact on the improved in order to achieve a cohesive and accessible campus and the surrounding street system with particular open space network. care to street systems that are contiguous with residential neighborhoods. • incorporate accessibility as an integral part of the design of • maintain the cap of 12,300 parking stalls. 10 University of Washington Master Plan -- Seattle Campus: Goals and Objectives Objectives by Campus Area • locate, landscape, and screen parking to prevent detracting from the overall quality of the campus environment while Distinctive environments comprise the different areas of campus. promoting safety and security. These areas include the Central, West, Southwest, South, and East campuses. Each area is distinguished by varying structures and uses. • clearly identify entries into campus and improve signage The Campus Master Plan recognizes and advances these distinctions around campus. as fundamental to realizing a rich, inspiring, and supportive environment. Development Objectives The objectives that follow represent ideas for change. They also Sites should be selected and developed to contribute to the embrace many of the ideas expressed in the University Community enhancement of the campus environment without detracting from the Urban Center Plan (UCUCP, August 1998—see Chapter IX). fundamental qualities of the campus. Decision-makers should strive to achieve these objectives. Costs and schedule-related factors will need to be considered in the Each potential
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form
    NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is used for documenting property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin How to Complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (formerly 16B). Complete each item by entering the requested information. ___X___ New Submission ________ Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Seattle’s Olmsted Parks and Boulevards (1903–68) B. Associated Historic Contexts None C. Form Prepared by: name/title: Chrisanne Beckner, MS, and Natalie K. Perrin, MS organization: Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA) street & number: 1904 Third Ave., Suite 240 city/state/zip: Seattle, WA 98101 e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] telephone: (503) 247-1319 date: December 15, 2016 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR 60 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. _______________________________ ______________________ _________________________ Signature of certifying official Title Date _____________________________________ State or Federal Agency or Tribal government I hereby certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register.
    [Show full text]
  • Context Statement
    CONTEXT STATEMENT THE CENTRAL WATERFRONT PREPARED FOR: THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, CITY OF SEATTLE November 2006 THOMAS STREET HISTORY SERVICES 705 EAST THOMAS STREET, #204 SEATTLE, WA 98102 2 Central Waterfront and Environs - Historic Survey & Inventory - Context Statement - November 2006 –Update 1/2/07 THE CENTRAL WATERFRONT CONTEXT STATEMENT for THE 2006 SURVEY AND INVENTORY Central Waterfront Neighborhood Boundaries and Definitions For this study, the Central Waterfront neighborhood covers the waterfront from Battery Street to Columbia Street, and in the east-west direction, from the waterfront to the west side of First Avenue. In addition, it covers a northern area from Battery Street to Broad Street, and in the east- west direction, from Elliott Bay to the west side of Elliott Avenue. In contrast, in many studies, the Central Waterfront refers only to the actual waterfront, usually from around Clay Street to roughly Pier 48 and only extends to the east side of Alaskan Way. This study therefore includes the western edge of Belltown and the corresponding western edge of Downtown. Since it is already an historic district, the Pike Place Market Historic District was not specifically surveyed. Although Alaskan Way and the present shoreline were only built up beginning in the 1890s, the waterfront’s earliest inhabitants, the Native Americans, have long been familiar with this area, the original shoreline and its vicinity. Native Peoples There had been Duwamish encampments along or near Elliott Bay, long before the arrival of the Pioneers in the early 1850s. In fact, the name “Duwamish” is derived from that people’s original name for themselves, “duwAHBSH,” which means “inside people,” and referred to the protected location of their settlements inside the waters of Elliott Bay.1 The cultural traditions of the Duwamish and other coastal Salish tribes were based on reverence for the natural elements and on the change of seasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Hutchinson Hall UW Historic Resources Addendum
    Hutchinson Hall UW Historic Resources Addendum BOLA Architecture + Planning June 8, 2012 1. INTRODUCTION Background The University of Washington is proposing to reroof portions of Hutchinson Hall, which was built in 1927 as the Women’s Physical Education Building. The building is located in the north area of campus, which dates from its establishment in the late 19th century. The proposed project will involve repairs or replacement of deteriorated, original and non-original roofing, which consists of slate and composition shingles, as well as membrane materials at built-in gutters and flat roof areas. The original roof also has copper flashing, ridge cresting, eave gutters and downspouts. Consistent with its historic preservation policies, as outlined in its “University of Washington Master Plan—Seattle Campus” of January 2003 (2003 Seattle Campus Master Plan), the University of Washington sought historic and urban design information about Hutchinson Hall in a Historic Resources Addendum (HRA). This type of report is developed for any project that makes exterior alterations to a building over 50 years old, or is adjacent to a building or a significant campus feature older than 50 years. Hutchinson Hall is subject to this requirement because of its age. An HRA is required also for public spaces identified in Fig. III-2 of the 2003 Seattle Campus Master Plan. This report provides historical and architectural information about the building, a preliminary evaluation of its historic significance to the University, information about the proposed project, and recommendations. A bibliography and list of source documents is provided at the end of the text, followed by original drawings, building plans, and historic and contemporary photographs.
    [Show full text]
  • SR 520, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project
    Historic Property at 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave. E, Seattle, WA 98112 Inventory Report for LOCATION SECTION Field Site No.: SR520W259 OAHP No.: Historic Name: Common Name: 2517 Lake Washington Blvd Property Address: 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave. E, Seattle, WA 98112 Comments: County Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/4 1/4 Sec Quadrangle Coordinate Reference King T25R04na 21 NE SEATTLE NORTH Zone: 10 Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Digitized Source Sequence: 1 Easting: 552660 Northing: 5276769 Sequence: 1 Easting: 552660 Northing: 5276769 Tax No./Parcel No. Plat/Block/Lot Supplemental Map(s) Acreage 0260000045 Arensberg Add/0010/TR9 0.18 IDENTIFICATION SECTION Survey Name: SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project Field Recorder: Lori Durio Date Recorded: 9/14/2009 Owner's Name: Owner Address: City/State/Zip: Childs, Shawn M 2517 Lake Washington Blvd. E Seattle, WA 98112 Classification: Building Resource Status Comments Survey/Inventory Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District: National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: DESCRIPTION SECTION Historic Use: Domestic - Single Family House View of front elevation taken 2/29/2004 Current Use: Domestic - Single Family House Photography Neg. No (Roll No./Frame No.): N/A Plan: L-Shape No. of Stories: 1 Comments: Structural System: Platform Frame Changes to plan: Intact Changes to interior: Unknown Style Form/Type Changes to original cladding: Intact Changes to other: Ranch Single Family - Side Gable Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/23/2009 11:18:18 AM Historic Property at 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • LAKE UNION Historical WALKING TOUR
    B HistoryLink.org Lake Union Walking Tour | Page 1 b Introduction: Lake Union the level of Lake Union. Two years later the waters of Salmon Bay were raised behind the his is a Cybertour of Seattle’s historic Chittenden Locks to the level of Lake Union. South Lake Union neighborhood, includ- Historical T As the Lake Washington Ship Canal’s ing the Cascade neighborhood and portions Walking tour Government Locks (now Hiram of the Denny Regrade. It was written Chittenden Locks) neared its 1917 and curated by Paula Becker with completion, the shores of Lake Union the assistance of Walt Crowley and sprouted dozens of boat yards. For Paul Dorpat. Map by Marie McCaffrey. most of the remaining years of the Preparation of this feature was under- twentieth century, Lake Union was written by Vulcan Inc., a Paul G. Allen one of the top wooden-boat building Company. This Cybertour begins at centers in the world, utilizing rot- Lake Union Park, then loosely follows resistant local Douglas fir for framing the course of the Westlake Streetcar, and Western Red Cedar for planking. with forays into the Cascade neighbor- During and after World War I, a hood and into the Seattle Center area. fleet of wooden vessels built locally for the war but never used was moored Seattle’s in the center of Lake Union. Before “Little Lake” completion of the George Washington ake Union is located just north of the Washington, Salmon Bay, and Puget Sound. Memorial Bridge (called Aurora Bridge) in L geographic center and downtown core A little more than six decades later, Mercer’s 1932, a number of tall-masted ships moored of the city of Seattle.
    [Show full text]
  • University District Historic Survey Report
    University District Historic Survey Report Prepared by Caroline Tobin and Sarah Sodt Cultural Resource Consultants For Seattle Department of Neighborhoods, Historic Preservation Program and University District Arts & Heritage Committee September 2002 University District Historic Survey Report Contents Acknowledgments i Project Background and Goals 1 Description of Survey Area 2 Project Methodology and Survey Process 4 Historic Context Statement 8 Survey Results/Inventory Analysis 24 Recommendations 27 Concluding Comments 28 Bibliography 29 Inventory Catalog/Index A-1 Inventory Catalog by Building Type and Address B-1 Figures Following page 1 – University District Historic Resources Survey Area 2 2 – Platting of the University District 9 3 – University District Historic Resources Inventory 23 4 – Potential Historic Districts in the University District 24 5 – Southwest Quadrant of the University District 28 6 – Northwest Quadrant of the University District 29 7 – Northeast Quadrant of the University District 30 Acknowledgments The consultants would like to thank the members of the University District Arts & Heritage Committee for their incredible enthusiasm and volunteer support for the University District Gems Historical Survey project. This survey would never have taken place without two key individuals: Patty Whisler, indefatigable University District activist par excellence, and Karen Ko, Coordinator, University Neighborhood Service Center and the acting chair of the University District Arts & Heritage Committee. Both Patty and Karen served on the steering committee for the University District Gems Survey and provided valuable guidance and coordination, outreach support, project administration, and more, during the course of the survey project. Other members of the project steering committee included Michael Delury (University Library), Susan Coleman, and Irene Holroyd.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional certification comments, entries, and narrative items on continuation sheets if needed (NPS Form 10-900a). 1. Name of Property historic name Colonnade Hotel other names/site number Standard Hotel; Gateway Hotel; Gatewood Hotel; Gatewood Apartments 2. Location street & number 107 Pine Street not for publication city or town Seattle vicinity state Washington code WA county King code 033 zip code 98101 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X _ meets _ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: national statewide X local Applicable National Register Criteria X A B X C D Signature of certifying official/Title Date WASHINGTON SHPO State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • NPS Form 10 900 OMB No. 1024 0018
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional certification comments, entries, and narrative items on continuation sheets if needed (NPS Form 10-900a). 1. Name of Property historic name Seattle Art Museum other names/site number Asian Art Museum, Seattle Asian Art Museum 2. Location street & number 1400 East Prospect Street not for publication city or town Seattle vicinity state Washington code WA county King code 033 zip code 98112 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this x nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X_ meets _ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: national statewide X local Applicable National Register Criteria X A B X C D Signature of certifying official/Title Date WASHINGTON SHPO State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Washington West Campus Utility Plant Project
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON WEST CAMPUS UTILITY PLANT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON April 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON WEST CAMPUS UTILITY PLANT PROJECT Prepared By: EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc. April 7, 2015 PREFACE The purpose of this Environmental Checklist is to identify and evaluate environmental impacts that could result from the development of the proposed project and to identify mitigation measures to mitigate those impacts. The proposal would involve the construction of a new utility plant in the West Campus area of the University of Washington. The proposed West Campus Utility Plant would serve the South Campus and West Campus areas and include two levels (basement and ground level) and approximately 11,310 gross square feet of building space. Chillers and cooling towers would be installed to support an initial capacity of 3,000 tons of chilled water, with full buildout capacity for up to 10,500 tons of chilled water. Emergency power generation would also be provided and exterior generators would be installed on the rooftop. Emergency generators would provide an initial capacity of six megawatts of power with space for an expanded capacity of up to 12 megawatts. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires that all governmental agencies consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before the proposal is decided upon. This Environmental Checklist has been prepared in compliance with SEPA (Chapter 197-11, Washington Administrative Code) and the University of Washington’s SEPA policies. This Environmental Checklist is divided into three sections. Chapter 1 provides an introduction and background information on the proposal, including campus planning context, site location, existing site conditions, surrounding uses, and a summary of the proposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Lpbcurrentnom UW Pavilion Pool.Pdf
    The University of Washington Pavilion Pool Seattle Landmark Nomination September 7, 2018 BOLA Architecture + Planning Seattle University of Washington Pavilion Pool Seattle Landmark Nomination September 7, 2018 CONTENTS Landmarks Nomination Form (1 page) 1. Introduction 1 Background Research Seattle’s Landmarks Process 2. Property Data 3 3. Architectural Description 4 The Campus Setting and the Site Adjacent Hec Edmundson Pavilion Adjacent Graves Annex and Graves Annex Addition The Pavilion Pool Structure and Exterior Features Interior Spaces and Finishes 4. Historical Context and Significance 10 Overview of the Campus Development of the Athletic Precinct The Social Role of Public Swimming Pools Recreation and Athletics on the Campus Competitive Swimming at the University The Building Style Architect Carl F. Gould of Bebb & Gould Structural Engineer Melvin O. Sylliaasen The Original Builder, the Western Construction Company 5. Bibliography 22 6. Illustrations 25 Index to Figures and Illustrations Cover: South facade of the Pavilion Pool (Connie Gray, Confluence Environmental Company, May 2, 2016), and an aerial view of the University’s athletic precinct in 2001 (Seattle Municipal Archives, Item 20010620). BOLA Architecture + Planning 3800 Ashworth Avenue North Seattle, Washington 98103-8119 University of Washington Pavilion Pool Landmark Nomination BOLA Architecture + Planning September 7, 2018 1. INTRODUCTION Background The University of Washington’s Pavilion Pool was designed in 1937 and constructed in 1938‐1939 at the east end of a larger athletic facility, the Men’s Physical Education Building. The earlier building, later named the Hec Edmundson Pavilion (“Hec Ed”), was built more than a decade earlier, in 1928. It contained a large gymnasium that served variety of competitive athletics, including basketball, boxing, and volleyball.
    [Show full text]
  • Anderson Hall Cultural Resource Inventory
    Cultural Resource Inventory for Anderson Hall, University of Washington campus, Seattle, Washington Prepared for University of Washington Prepared by Peter Meijer Architect PC 710 NE 21st Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97232 (503) 517-0283 June 28, 2011 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I PROJECT LOCATION I PHYSICAL SETTING AND DESCRIPTION I HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Historical Development of the Campus 4 Building History and Context 5 Architects 8 CONCLUSIONS 9 Bibliography 10 APPENDICES Maps 12 Figures 15 Inventory form 25 INTRODUCTION Anderson Hall, a four-story building on the University of Washington campus in Seattle, was constructed in 1925. It was designed by Bebb and Gould, a prolific and highly successful architectural design partnership. Anderson Hall is named for Alfred H. Anderson, a lumberman whose wife, Agnes H. Anderson, gave the funds for the building to the University in honor of her late husband. The building is in the Collegiate Gothic style, and houses the College of the Environment’s School of Forest Resources. Anderson Hall has received funding for the planning and design of renovation work, and the University plans to request further funding for construction work in the 2013-15 Capital Budget from the State of Washington. The renovation provides an opportunity to redesign the interior program space to be more efficient and flexible to meet the needs of the College of the Environment for modern research and instruction, but will also address structural, seismic, life safety, hazardous materials, accessibility, and other code deficiencies and will improve the building enclosure (windows and masonry systems) to ensure long-term preservation. As part of the planning and design work, a Cultural Resources Survey report has been requested by the University.
    [Show full text]
  • The Carl S. English Jr. Botanical Garden at the Hiram M. Chittenden
    THE CARL S. ENGLISH JR. BOTANICAL GARDEN AT THE HIRAM M. CHITTENDEN LOCKS: SUPPLEMENTAL HISTORIC GROUNDS REPORT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR INCLUSION IN LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL PROJECT MASTER PLANNING Stephen Munro June 2019 A project in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Environmental Horticulture University of Washington School of Environmental and Forest Sciences Committee: Jon Bakker, Caren Crandell, Jim Fridley, and Soo-Hyung Kim 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 9 PREFACE .................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Preface................................................................................................................ 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 11 3.1 Executive summary ............................................................................................. 11 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE ..................................................................................... 12 4.1 Statement of purpose .......................................................................................... 12 Mission ......................................................................................................... 12 Background and Context ............................................................................. 12 What this report
    [Show full text]